Petition for Obama on Marijuana Policy…Growing

On Monday, politics columnist and KHOW talk-show host David Sirota, filed a petition through the Obama administration’s “We the People” program on the White House website requesting the president support a federal law to protect marijuana legalization in Colorado and Washington and any other states that decide to pass similar laws in the future…

…Less than 24 hours since Sirota started the petition it has nearly 10,000 signatures, but the petition needs a total 25,000 to reach its goal. Read the full petition here.

The congressional proposal that Sirota references is regarding the proposed legislation that Colorado Reps Diana DeGette (CD1), Ed Perlmutter (CD7) and Jared Polis (CD2) are working on independently and together that would exempt states that pass marijuana legalization legislation from the federal Controlled Substances Act, The Colorado Independent reported over the weekend.

9 Community Comments,
Facebook Comments

The fiscal cliff,the economy, losing CIA Director Patraus, long term budget plans, Medicare, Affordable Care Act and Medicaid expansion, the war in Afganistan, maybe losing that General via Patraus’s woman problems, the list is endless. Marijuana legalization is at the bottom of my list. Leave him alone.

but the administration can deal with pot issues at the same time they deal with all you list and more. OTOH, I would not want Senators Rand, McConnell et al to be able to say “He had all this and yet the first thing he took on was pot” This issue though does have some immediacy to it as CO, WA try to implement rules and follow voter wishes. Even MMJ here, CA, AZ and other places can be made more hassle free if the fed acts

I signed the petition. Also, relieved of the awesome responsibilities of protecting society from someone smoking a joint, the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Colorado, can investigate and prosecute the financial crooks who destroyed our economy.

Usually, the White House lets the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) respond to any marijuana-related petitions on its “We the People” site. And, by statute, it’s the ONDCP’s job to speak sideways:

By law, the drug czar must oppose any attempt to legalize the use (in any form) of illicit drugs.[12] According to the “Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998″[13] the director of the ONDCP

(12) shall ensure that no Federal funds appropriated to the Office of National Drug Control Policy shall be expended for any study or contract relating to the legalization (for a medical use or any other use) of a substance listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812) and take such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize the use of a substance (in any form) that — 1. is listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812); and 2. has not been approved for use for medical purposes by the Food and Drug Administration;

The Government Accountability Office has found that this law authorizes the ONDCP to disseminate misleading information (lie) in order to oppose legalization:[14]

Finally, apart from considerations of whether any particular law has been violated, you have asked whether the Deputy Director’s letter disseminated misleading information in connection with statements relating to the debate over legalization of marijuana. Clearly, the Deputy Director’s statements reflect one perspective regarding marijuana – a perspective that is disputed by others with different viewpoints. However, ONDCP is specifically charged with the responsibility for “taking such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize the use” of certain controlled substances such as marijuana – a responsibility which logically could include the making of advocacy statements in opposition to legalization efforts. The Deputy Director’s statements about marijuana are thus within the statutory role assigned to ONDCP. Given this role, we do not see a need to examine the accuracy of the Deputy Director’s individual statements in detail.